1986F150Six

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Ford-E0TZ-9A758-A-CABLE-ASY/174241235679?hash=item28919642df:g:Q8QAAOSwakteiY0j

https://www.ebay.com/itm/NOS-1973-Ford-Mustang-Tilt-Steering-Column-Release-Lever-Retainer-D1AZ3E43B/174164239423?epid=1211196206&hash=item288cff643f:g:yZ0AAOSwi5VeJvZt

Very nice of you to share!

The speed plays a big part, indeed. My happy spot seems to be 60-62 mph. How does aerodynamic drag relate to speed? The relationship of drag to airspeed is simple. It’s essentially the same as the “Square-Cube Law.” Which states that if you double the speed, the drag will increase by a factor of four. At 60 mph, think of the number 3600 [60 X 60]; now @ 75 mph, that figure jumps to 5625 [75 X 75]. At 75 mph, the drag is 56.25% greater tan @ 60 mph! This requires much more horsepower and consumes much more fuel. And, keep in mind that the larger than stock sized wheels and or tires usually weigh much more. Plus, there is more road/tire friction as well as the amount of air being pushed ahead of the tire. This requires more power to accelerate and decelerate, so braking, ride and handling are impacted. Another thing, as tires are larger, the truck if lifted and more air passes under the truck. This is called dirty air and causes turbulence and drag. My stock tire size is 215/75 X 15.

Looks good!

I agree!

Chris, are you located in an area which checks emissions?

Fond Of Rear Distinction

SOLD for $11,400.

Hello, Vinny! How have you been?

Welcome, Chris!

Welcome!

Welcome aboard!

Welcome to the forum!

https://www.ebay.com/itm/E3TZ-10883-B-NEW-OEM-FORD-MOTORCRAFT-TEMP-TEMPERATURE-GAUGE-E3TZ10883B/164148119492?epid=1194059217&hash=item2637fd87c4:g:FP4AAOSwNThePaYD

Blacktop, that is a beautiful photo... where is the painting? Just kidding! That is beautiful!

When you are hot, you're hot!

That's what everybody knows. But every time I've seen actual torque curves they show that the 302 makes more torque at every engine speed than the 300. Yes the 302 makes it's peak torque at a higher speed than the 300 does. But the 302 still makes more torque at the 300s torque peak than the 300 does. And again, I'm not saying the 302 is a better truck engine in the real world. I believe everyone's "butt dynos" are accurately saying the 300 is better. But the torque curves I've seen don't explain why. Okay, for those that do not know me well, I will "fess up" that first I love the 6 bangers and have more head knowledge [from reading] than finger knowledge [although I can turn a wrench]. However, my personality and career choice have instilled in me the desire to document and report accurately, so I will share a little of what I believe to be true. Based on what Gary posted [Ford documentation]: The 300 generates from 235 lb-ft of torque at 1200 RPM to 260 lb-ft at 1400 RPM, depending on the application. But there are some that generate 245 or 250 at 1600 RPM if set up for high altitude or auto transmissions. The 302 generates 250 lb-ft at from 2200 to 2600 RPM if you stick with the 49-state engines. But, the CA-spec engines are rated at much lower RPM but comparable #'s, which is very confusing. The 302/5.0L generates 5-15 lb-ft more than the 300/4.9L, but at a significantly higher engine speed. Whereas the straight six is recognized as having a relatively flat torque curve, the V8 is not known for having that same characteristic. So, it is difficult for me to understand how the V8 has more torque than the 6 cylinder at the 300/4.9L's maximum torque @ the 1200-1400 RPM range. Let me address the footnote #1 under the first chart which was posted by Gary. This is regarding where the 4.9L engine was rated @ 260 lb-ft @ 1600 RPMs in trucks equipped with 2.47 rear gears and manual O.D. transmissions. Most are under the impression that the factory camshaft in all 240s, 300s and 4.9L engines had the same specifications from 1965-1996 [except for possibly industrial engines, i.e. H20 pumps, generators and airport tugs]. I cannot currently find this, but years ago, I ran across a Ford document which indicated there was a different engineering number for the camshaft used in the trucks described in footnote #1 [above]. Having owned a 1984 F150 with 4.9L engine, 2.47 rear gears and 4 speed manual OD, I can tell you this truck would routinely deliver 26+ mpg @ 65 mph and could cruise @ 55 mph [level ground] @ ~1230 RPMs. My current 1986 F150 with 4.9L engine, 3.08 rear gears and 4 speed manual OD cruises effortlessly @ 70 mph [1950 RPMs]. It gets the best fuel mileage @ ~60 mph [~1675 RPMs]. At any engine speed of 1100 RPMs or greater, in any gear, the 1986 truck will accelerate without bucking. Overdrive is happier @ 1250 and above. The 302/5.0L will absolutely spank the six cylinder if in an acceleration contest, but try to maintain any of the above described speeds with the 302/5.0 and have the same gears combination and I believe a marked difference will be realized. Ford engineers realized this when the 300/4.9L was offered in F350s and F600s, but the 302/5.0L was never offered in any truck beyond the F250. By the way, the 302/5.0L is a great engine and as such was offered in automobiles as well as trucks. The 300/4.9L engine was never offered in an automobile. In the end, we all have our preference and that is okay. Lets all work together to keep this wonderful forum thriving!

The windshield molding and door handles can be powder coated!

Calling: Bret and Holly!

Let the money fly!!! https://www.ebay.com/itm/NOS-OEM-Ford-1980-1986-Truck-Grille-Headlight-Doors-Bezels-1982-1983-1984-1985/143365879547?epid=1923517768&hash=item216145b6fb:g:wcwAAOSwk5NdVyg3

Others can share their personal experiences, but the general consensus is that SEM paints are quite good and preparation is the key.

Nice truck! Is that two-tone red?

If one doesn't ask [price], one will never receive!

Absolutely splendid!